A tale of 2 cities, 2 very different leagues

As
the slow and painful demise of the Montreal Expos continues, one can't
help but compare the Expos' recent history with that of the Vancouver
Grizzlies, the struggling NBA franchise that will soon be moving south
of the Canadian border.

The history of these two franchises illustrates the major challenges
common to professional sports teams operating in Canada — and
speaks volumes about the differences in the leadership of the NBA and
Major League Baseball.

The trials and tribulations of the Montreal Expos have been well chronicled.
The Expos are a baseball team with a history of losing in a hockey town
used to the winning ways of the Canadiens. The team plays in a ballpark
built for the Olympics that offers none of the charm or allure of modern
baseball venues. Its expenses are paid largely in U.S. dollars but its
revenue comes in Canadian dollars, worth 35 cents less.

Only the most talented and creative team and league executives might
possess the necessary skills to overcome these obstacles. While previous
ownership groups made attempts at making the Expos economically viable
by reducing payroll and developing a constant stream of young and talented
major league players, those ownership groups were unable to succeed
in turning the franchise around.

Even the advent of revenue sharing following the conclusion of the
players' strike in 1995 couldn't help. The ownership group led by Claude
Brochu chose not to use its portion of revenue sharing to improve the
product on the field but pocketed it for other purposes.

After a prolonged process, an ownership group led by American Jeffrey
Loria purchased the Expos from the Brochu ownership group two seasons
ago. While Loria was publicly pledging to turn the franchise around,
many speculated from the outset that his motive was to move the team
to Virginia or another U.S. location.

Even though Loria has increased the team's payroll, numerous operational
decisions he has made have destined the team for continuing failure.
In 2000, the Expos played the entire season with no TV contract and
no over-the-air radio contract — losing the chance for exposure
— because Loria refused to accept deals that he felt were below
market value. This season, television and radio are back to a limited
extent.

Loria's leadership has led to dramatic declines in attendance. Through
June 18, home attendance stood at a pathetic average of barely 8,800
fans per game, and crowds now are regularly below 5,000 fans per game.
To add icing to the cake, the team fired its long-time manager, Felipe
Alou, a managerial icon and fan favorite in Montreal.

Throughout the decline of the Expos, Major League Baseball kept its
distance, presumably not wanting to pull the team out of Montreal and
hoping the franchise could work things out. It doesn't take a genius
to see that the writing has been on the wall in Montreal for several
seasons. Apart from the piddling revenue sharing under the collective-bargaining
agreement, Major League Baseball offered little in the way of assistance
or guidance.

Of late, MLB's solution is the unprecedented suggestion of "contraction,"
and that isn't being suggested as a solution to the Expos' problem as
much as it is being thrown out as a bargaining ploy for the upcoming
labor negotiations with the MLBPA.

In contrast to the Expos, the short history of the Vancouver Grizzlies
in Canada tells quite a different story. After a few short years of
ownership, John McCaw decided to divest his interest in the Grizzlies
two years ago. Yet the NBA initially vetoed his sale to Bill Laurie,
new owner of the NHL St. Louis Blues and the Savvis Center, presumably
doubting Laurie's intentions of keeping the team in Vancouver.

Orca Bay then quickly found a new buyer, Michael Heisley, who was swiftly
approved by the NBA. However, after less than one season, claiming losses
in excess of $40 million, Heisley announced his intention to move the
Grizzlies to the United States rather than continue the charade of trying
to survive in an economic market that just doesn't make long-term sense
for NBA basketball.

The NBA, rather than prolonging a situation that could not be profitable
in the foreseeable future, quickly agreed that Heisley could move the
franchise. Further, the NBA was not shy in publicly stating its own
view that professional basketball could not succeed in Vancouver under
current economic circumstances.

The NBA's handling of the Grizzlies situation demonstrates the great
difference between the leadership of the NBA and the leadership of MLB.
In the competitive world of professional sports, it is crucial to react
swiftly in situations that cast the sport in a negative light. Sometimes
difficult short-term decisions must be made to avoid long-term negative
publicity.

From a public relations point of view, the NBA quickly realized that
the Vancouver situation was not going to be resolved. Pretending that
it would be resolved could create years of negative media coverage focusing
not only on the economic problems faced by the Grizzlies, but by the
NBA itself. By going ahead with the move, the NBA and the Grizzlies
can begin to turn the corner and focus on the possibility of success
in a new market.

In contrast, Major League Baseball has allowed the Expos' situation
to fester to the point where baseball fans in Montreal have completely
lost interest. With media reports constantly focusing on the negatives
surrounding the Expos, the public's view of the sport and baseball has
soured dramatically. Instead of dealing with the situation decisively
and making hard decisions, the Expos and baseball continue to suffer
a slow death in Montreal.

While the Expos and the Grizzlies faced some common economic challenges,
the NBA's swift response to the Grizzlies' situation speaks volumes
for its success as an organization as contrasted to that of Major League
Baseball.

Jeffrey Citron is former counsel at the National Hockey League Players'
Association and now is a sports business consultant and sports lawyer
with Goodmans LLP in Toronto.